The Commerce Department has delivered a final determination that imports of corrosion-resistant steel from China, India, Italy, South Korea, and Taiwan were illegally dumped in the U.S. The investigation found that countervailable subsidization of imports of corrosion-resistant steel products from China, India, Italy and South Korea occurred and that there were actually no countervailable subsidies of imports of corrosion-resistant steel from Taiwan.

Companies from China received final anti-dumping duties of 209.97%. Many Chinese companies also did not cooperate with the countervailing duties investigation and were hit with CVD tariffs of 241.07%.

This means many Chinese companies received total import tariffs of 451.04%.

Hyundai Steel Company in South Korea got hit with anti-dumping duties of 40.97%.

What is Dumping?

For the purpose of anti-dumping investigations, dumping occurs when a foreign company sells a product in the U.S. at less than its fair value. For the purpose of countervailing duties investigations, a countervailable subsidy is financial assistance from a foreign government that benefits the production of goods from foreign companies and is limited to specific enterprises or industries, or is contingent either upon export performance or upon the use of domestic goods over imported goods.

China Investigation

In the China anti-dumping investigation, Commerce found dumping has occurred by the mandatory respondent, Yieh Phui (China) Technomaterial Co., Ltd., as well as the two parties which qualified for separate rates, at a margin of 209.97%. Commerce calculated a China-wide dumping rate of 209.97% for all other producers/exporters in China.

India Investigation

In the India anti-dumping investigation, Commerce found dumping has occurred by the mandatory respondents JSW Steel, Ltd. and Uttam Galva Steels Limited at margins of 4.44% and 3.05%, respectively. Commerce calculated a dumping margin of 3.86% for all other producers/exporters in India.

Italy Investigation

In the Italy anti-dumping investigation, Commerce found dumping has occurred by mandatory respondent Acciaieria Arvedi S.p.A. at a margin of 12.63%. Commerce also found dumping has occurred by mandatory respondent Marcegaglia S.p.A. at a margin of 92.12% based on adverse facts available, as information the company provided in the proceeding could not be verified. Commerce calculated a dumping margin of 12.63% for all other producers/exporters in Italy.

Korea Investigation

In the South Korea anti-dumping investigation, Commerce found dumping has occurred by mandatory respondents Dongkuk Steel Mill Co., Ltd./Union Steel Manufacturing Co., Ltd. and Hyundai Steel Company at margins of 8.75% and 47.80%, respectively. Commerce calculated a dumping margin of 28.28% for all other producers/exporters in South Korea.

Taiwan Investigation

In the Taiwan anti-dumping investigation, mandatory respondents Yieh Phui Enterprise Co., Ltd. and Prosperity Tieh Enterprise Co., Ltd. were collapsed and treated as a single entity for the purposes of the anti-dumping investigation. Commerce found dumping has occurred by the single, collapsed, respondent at a margin of 3.77%. Commerce calculated a dumping margin of 3.77% for all other producers/exporters in Taiwan.

China CVD Investigation

In the China countervailing duties investigation, Commerce determined that mandatory respondent Yieh Phui (China) Technomaterial Co., Ltd. received countervailable subsidies at a rate of 39.05%. Mandatory respondents Angang Group Hong Kong Company Ltd., Baoshan Iron & Steel Co., Ltd., Duferco S.A. (and its cross-owned companies Hebei Iron & Steel Group, and Tangshan Iron and Steel Group Co., Ltd.), Changshu Everbright Material Technology, and Handan Iron & Steel Group either notified Commerce that they would not participate in this investigation or did not participate in the investigation.

As a result, these companies received a subsidy rate of 241.07% based on adverse facts available following Commerce’s final determination that the companies failed to cooperate in the investigation. Commerce calculated a subsidy rate of 39.05% for all other producers/exporters in China.

India CVD Investigation

In the India CVD investigation, Commerce determined that mandatory respondent JSW Steel Limited received countervailable subsidies at a rate of 29.46% and that respondent Uttam Galva Steels Limited received a countervailable subsidies at a rate of 8%. Commerce calculated a subsidy rate of 18.73% for all other producers/exporters in India.

In the Italy CVD investigation, Commerce determined that mandatory respondents Acciaieria Arvedi S.p.A. and Marcegaglia S.p.A. received countervailable subsidies at rates of 0.48% and 0.07% respectively, which are both de minimis, meaning no duties will be collected at U.S. borders and ports.

Respondent Ilva S.p.A., which did not participate in this investigation, received a subsidy rate of 38.51% based on adverse facts available following Commerce’s final determination that the company failed to cooperate in the investigation. Commerce calculated a subsidy rate of 13.02% for all other producers/exporters in Italy.

Korea CVD Investigation

In the South Korea CVD investigation, Commerce determined that mandatory respondent Dongbu Steel Co., Ltd./Dongbu Incheon Steel Co., Ltd. received countervailable subsidies at a rate of 1.19%, and respondent Union Steel Manufacturing Co. Ltd./Dongkuk Steel Mill Co., Ltd. received countervailable subsidies at a rate of 0.72%, which is de minimis (no tariffs will be collected). Commerce calculated a subsidy rate of 1.19%, barely minimis, for all other producers/exporters in South Korea.

Taiwan CVD Investigation

In the Taiwan CVD investigation, Commerce determined that mandatory respondents Prosperity Tieh Enterprise Co., Ltd.; Hong-Ye Steel Co., Ltd.; Prosperity Did Enterprise Co., Ltd.; and Chan Lin Enterprise Co., Ltd. and Yieh Phui Enterprise Co., Ltd.; Yieh Corporation Limited; Shin Yang Steel Co., Ltd.; and Synn Industrial Co., Ltd. did not receive countervailable subsidies at all. Because the final determination in this investigation is negative, no “all others” CVD rate has been applied to any other producers/exporters in Taiwan and none of their products will require import duties to be paid.

As a result of the affirmative final anti-dumping determinations, Commerce will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection to collect cash deposits equal to the applicable weighted-average dumping margins. Further, in the investigations where Commerce made affirmative final CVD determinations, if the U.S. International Trade Commission issues affirmative injury determinations, Commerce will order the resumption of the suspension of liquidation and require cash deposits for CVD duties equal to the final subsidy rates established during the proceedings.

Next Steps

If the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) issues negative injury determinations, these investigations will be terminated and no producers or exporters will be subject to future cash deposits for either anti-dumping or CVD duties.

Commerce found that critical circumstances exist with respect to certain exporters from China and South Korea in the preliminary determinations and continues to do so in the final determinations. Because Marcegaglia failed to fully cooperate in the Italy anti-dumping investigation, Commerce found that critical circumstances also exist as an adverse inference in the final determination.

Though Commerce did not previously find that critical circumstances exist with respect to exporters in Taiwan because its preliminary determination was negative, due to the affirmative final determination, Commerce found that critical circumstances also exist with respect to all other producers and exporters and, therefore, Customs and Border Protection will be instructed to impose provisional measures retroactively on entries of corrosion-resistant steel from all other exporters not individually reviewed up to 90 days prior to publication of the final determination Federal Register notice.

For Marcegaglia in the Italy AD investigation, CBP will be instructed to impose provisional measures retroactively on entries of corrosion-resistant steel up to 90 days prior to publication of the final determination Federal Register notice.